View source for Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality

{{Short description|Ideological doctrine of Nicholas I of Russia}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=May 2025}}
[[File:Botman - Emperor Nicholas I (cropped 2).jpg|thumb|[[Nicholas I of Russia|Nicholas I]] (reigned 1825–55) made '''Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality''' the main Imperialist doctrine of his reign]]

'''Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality''' ({{langx|ru|Правосла́вие, самодержа́вие, наро́дность}}; [[Transliteration|transliterated]]: Pravoslávie, samoderzhávie, naródnost'), also known as '''Official Nationalism''',<ref name="R132">Riasanovsky, p. 132</ref><ref>Nationality in this context starts with a capital letter to differentiate it from nationality/''{{lang|ru|narodnost}}'' as one of its three parts</ref> was the dominant Imperial ideological doctrine of Russian Emperor [[Nicholas I of Russia|Nicholas I]]. The doctrine sought Imperial unity under [[Eastern Orthodox Church|Orthodox Christianity]] and the absolute authority of the Emperor, while suppressing ideas deemed destructive to that unity. It followed a broader European [[reactionary]] trend that sought to restore and defend political institutions that were overthrown in the [[Napoleonic Wars]].<ref name="R133">Riasanovsky, p.133</ref>

"The Triad" of Official Nationality was originally proposed by Minister of Education [[Sergey Uvarov]] in his 2 April 1833,<ref>Date as in Riasanovsky, p. 132</ref> circular letter to subordinate educators.<ref name="H146">Hosking, p. 146</ref> It was soon embraced by Nicholas and his establishment and gained wide public recognition, vocally supported by intellectuals like [[Mikhail Pogodin]],<ref name="R1389">Riasanovsky, pp. 138–39</ref> [[Fyodor Tyutchev]],<ref name="R135"/> and [[Nikolai Gogol]].<ref name="R135">Riasanovsky, p. 135</ref>

Critics of the policy saw this principle as a call for [[Russification]]. Yet the very fact of its existence, being Russia's first statewide political ideology since the 16th century,<ref name="H146"/> indicated the nation's brewing transition to [[modernity]].<ref name="K54">Hoffmann, Kotsonis, p. 54</ref>

==Quest for ideology==
{{Conservatism in Russia|Themes}}
Nicholas I emerged as the Emperor in the wake of the [[Decembrist revolt]]; subsequent investigation proved that disloyalty was deeply rooted within the noble estate—the sole foundation of the [[House of Romanov]].<ref name=H145>Hosking, p. 145</ref> His [[Paul I of Russia|father]] and [[Peter III of Russia|grandfather]] were killed by their own guards and statesmen in palace coups. Keen to eradicate the rebels and ensure his own physical security, Nicholas carefully studied proceedings of the Decembrists' investigation and was aware of defects in [[Alexander I of Russia|his predecessor]]'s government that fueled the mutiny.<ref name=H145/> "In one sense, the reign of Nicholas I was a protracted [[epilogue]] to the Decembrist rising."<ref name=H144>Hosking, p.144</ref>

Nicholas, acting in line with his [[Autocracy|absolutist]] predecessors of the [[Russian Enlightenment|Age of Enlightenment]], developed a state education system and completed codification of the law.<ref name=H1445>Hosking, pp.144-145,148</ref> He installed a highly regulated but ultimately inefficient government system of "anxious centralization", himself being the chief arbiter between rivalling statesmen.<ref name=H146>Hosking, p. 146</ref> The system created by Nicolas I was unsound and ineffective since the Emperor could not personally oversee all state business and review all papers to be signed.<ref name=H146/>

The Emperor found himself a prisoner of his own system, so he could only rely on his high officials in most of his day-to-day activity. Higher officials relied on officials of lower rank. In most cases government officials, even ministers, did things on their own and paid little attention to general instructions given by the Emperor in one case or another.<ref name=H146/>

The autocracy was exploited by government officials (''chinovniki'') for their own benefit. The autocracy in fact turned out to be a cover to hide the acts made by officials at all levels. Back in those days, it was ''chinovniki'' who had real power, but not the Emperor, who was nothing more but a promulgator of laws. Nevertheless, if a certain law was not lucrative or was disadvantageous for government officials, it was not a problem to make legal obstacles to enforce such law.<ref name=H146/>

Sometimes a law was simply abolished without the Emperor knowing about it, as it was usually the case with the Emperor’s acts regulating commercial activity of Saint Petersburg negotiants (''kuptsy''). In any case, the Emperor always got a report that everything went well and all his instructions had been implemented. But he also attributed the nobles' disloyalty to a Europe-wide conspiracy aimed at destroying ruling monarchies, religion, and morale.<ref name=H146/> Russia, according to his point of view, succeeded in the [[Napoleonic Wars]] while more advanced regimes failed, saving Europe from plunging into decay and [[atheism]].<ref name=H146/>

==Forging the triad==
[[File:Sergey Uvarov by Utkin.jpg|thumb|[[Sergey Uvarov]] in the 1830s. Engraving by [[Nikolai Utkin]].]]
[[Sergey Uvarov]], Minister of Education and President of the [[Russian Academy of Sciences]] since 1818, was also a writer, a scholar and at times was considered a [[freethought|freethinker]]. Yet, with a change in domestic politics, he easily adjusted to a tightened regime.<ref name="R132">Riasanovsky, p. 132</ref> In 1833 Uvarov forged the Emperor's program into a brief statement of ideology:

{{Quote|It is our common obligation to ensure that the education of the people be conducted, according to Supreme intention of our August Monarch, '''in the joint spirit of Orthodoxy, Autocracy and Nationality'''. I am convinced that every professor and teacher, being permeated by one and the same feeling of devotion to the throne and fatherland, will use all his resources to become a worthy tool for the government and to earn its complete confidence.<ref name="H146"/>}}

Tsar Nicholas I had remembered the [[Decembrist revolt]] for all his life. He always suspected secret societies and uprisings to be plotted around him. Such personal feelings of the Tsar had great influence on the development of Russia. In order to meet the demands of the new state of affairs under Nicholas I, the Minister of Public Education S. Uvarov proposed to give new original shape to the national educational system. 

He said that Russia needs such educational system which could produce skilled, professional, well prepared executors of the Emperor’s wishes. Such an educational system should not only provide knowledge to people, but also made them unconditionally loyal to the Emperor. Briefly speaking, Uvarov tried to deprive education of its most important integral part: an analytical and critical approach to an environment (specifically to the political environment).

According to Uvarov's theory, the Russian folk (''narod'') were very religious and devoted to the Emperor, the Orthodox religion, and autocracy as unconditional bases of the existence of Russia. ''Narodnost'' (nationality) is deemed to be the necessity to follow independent national traditions and to fight foreign influence. The theory stated that it was necessary to reject western ideas—freedom of thinking, freedom of personality, individualism, and rationalism—which were considered by Orthodox hierarchs as dangerous and rebellious. The chief of Russian political police (the III Department of His Majesty's Personal Chancellery) A. Benckendorff wrote that "the past of Russia was wonderful, the present is splendid and the future is above all dreams". These three concepts were considered as "pillar-walls" of the Russian Empire. Uvarov's triad was the first explicit statement of government ideology in Russian history since the 16th century.<ref name="H146"/> 

He repeated the triad and elaborated on the topic throughout the 16 years of his ministry<ref name="R132"/> and was eventually awarded the title of a [[count]]. "Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality" became the Uvarov family motto, decreed by Nicholas.<ref name="R133"/> Yet he also did much as a true educator, raising educational standards, establishing new colleges, and increasing the number of scholarships for overseas training. Under Uvarov, the "Russian educational system, with all its fundamental flaws, came to emphasise academic thoroughness and high standards", although it also became more exclusive at all levels.<ref name="R146">Riasanovsky, p. 146</ref>

==Components==
The three components of Uvarov's triad were

* [[Orthodoxy]]: Orthodox Christianity and the protection of the [[Russian Orthodox Church]].
* [[Tsarist autocracy|Autocracy]]: unconditional loyalty to the [[House of Romanov]] in return for [[paternalism|paternalist]] protection for all [[Social estates in the Russian Empire|social estates]].
* Nationality: ''[[Narodnost]]'' can be defined as "fidelity to Russia's distinct cultural heritage" and deference to "aspirations of the common people".<ref>{{cite web |title=Narodnost |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/narodnost |website=Britannica |access-date=6 August 2022}}</ref> It has been also translated as ''[[national spirit]]'',<ref>{{cite book |last=Hutchings |first=Stephen C. |title=Russian Literary Culture in the Camera Age: The Word as Image |url=https://archive.org/details/russianliteraryc00hutc |url-access=registration |publisher=Routledge |year=2004 |page=[https://archive.org/details/russianliteraryc00hutc/page/n98 86]|isbn= 041530668X }}</ref> and ''[[populism]]''.<ref>{{cite book |last=Thompson |first=Ewa M. | authorlink = Ewa Thompson|title=The Search for Self-definition in Russian Literature |publisher=John Benjamins Publishing Company |year=1991 |page=98 }}</ref> Before its adoption by Nicholas I, {{lang|ru|narodnost}} was a central tenet of [[Russian Romantic writers]], the Russian expression of a principle more often called [[Romantic nationalism]].<ref>[http://aatseel.org/100111/pdf/program/2007/30a5_1frazier_melissa.pdf O. I. Senkovskii and Romantic Empire]</ref>

The sequence of three parts of the triad remained fixed in all circumstances even when the words themselves changed: military cadets were instructed to be "Christians, loyal subjects, and Russians"; the common public motto called "For Faith, Tsar and Fatherland".<ref name="R135">Riasanovsky, p. 135</ref>

The triad was inherently unbalanced in favor of centralized autocracy. The [[Russian Orthodox Church]] was impoverished and incapable of being an independent political force.<ref name="H147">Hosking, p. 147</ref> The government remained wary of ''any'' philosophy, including [[theology]].<ref name="R135"/> Nationality through empowerment of the people was not a choice from the start and became even less probable after the dreaded [[nationalism|nationalist]] [[Revolutions of 1848]] "reduced Nicholas to a state of almost [[catatonia|catatonic]] fear".<ref name="H149">Hosking, p. 149</ref> It also ran against the ever-increasing role of [[Baltic Germans]] in the government system; even converted to Orthodoxy, they retained their distinct ethnicity.<ref name="H149">Hosking, p. 149</ref>

==Public reception==
The press, [[censorship|censored]] by the state, eagerly embraced the new doctrine and was dominated by it until the end of Nicholas's reign.<ref name="R134">Riasanovsky, p. 134</ref> [[Stepan Shevyryov]], editor of ''{{lang|ru|[[Moskvityanin]]}}'' magazine, asserted that "even if we did pick certain unavoidable blemishes from the West, we have on the other hand preserved in ourselves, in their purity, three fundamental feelings which contain the seed and guarantee of our future development."<ref name="R134"/>

[[Slavophilia|Slavophiles]], in particular, accepted the anti-European, paternalistic aspect of the doctrine. [[Mikhail Pogodin]] explained the paternalistic, peaceful nature of autocracy as seen by Slavophiles: "the secret of Russian history, the secret which not a single Western sage is able to comprehend: Russian history always depicts Russia as a single family in which the ruler is the father and the subjects are children. The father retains full authority over children while he allows them to have full freedom ... there can be no suspicion, no treason; their fate, their happiness, their peace they share in common. This is true in relation to the state as a whole..."<ref name="R1389">Riasanovsky, pp. 138–39</ref>

[[Nikolai Nadezhdin]], who initially entertained the Westernised, [[Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph Schelling|Schellingian]] notion of ''nationality'', radically changed his mind in favor of Official Nationality in the wake of the [[Pyotr Chaadayev|Chaadayev affair]] (1837), writing that "nationality had always consisted of love of the Tsar and obedience, and which in the future should display in itself, to Europe's dismay, a brilliant lesson of how from the holy unity of autocracy, must arise an exemplary and splendid national enlightenment...".<ref name="K55">Hoffmann, Kotsonis, p. 55</ref>

[[Nikolai Gogol]] in his final work ''[[Selected Passages from Correspondence with His Friends]]'' (1847) extended Official Nationality to relationships between landlords and serfs: "Make them [serfs] see clearly that in everything that concerns them you are acting in accordance with the will of God and not in accordance with some European or other fancies on your own."<ref name="R136">Riasanovsky, p. 136</ref>

== Comparisons to Putinism ==
[[File:Vladimir Putin at the New Jerusalem monastery (2017-11-15) 04.jpg|thumb|Vladimir Putin and [[Patriarch Kirill of Moscow|Patriarch Kirill]]]]
A number of commentators have compared the [[Putinism|ideology of Vladimir Putin]], ruler of Russia since 1999, to the doctrine of Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://news.ucr.edu/articles/2022/03/09/missing-piece-about-putin-and-ukraine|title=The missing piece about Putin and Ukraine|website=news.ucr.edu}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://lens.monash.edu/@politics-society/2022/03/21/1384545/putting-putins-false-history-of-ukraine-into-perspective|title=Putting Putin's false history of Ukraine into perspective|date=21 March 2022|website=lens.monash.edu}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/07/putin-stumps-for-the-orthodox-church-in-a-film-celebrating-the-kievan-rus-anniversary/278150/|title = Putin Stumps for the Orthodox Church in a Film Celebrating the Kievan Rus Anniversary|website = [[The Atlantic]]|date = 29 July 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|first=Anders |last=Åslund |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/how-putin-pushed-aside-the-oligarchs-and-made-russia-his-own/2020/07/09/acc3d91e-8332-11ea-878a-86477a724bdb_story.html |title=Book review of Putin's People: How the KGB Took Back Russia and Then Took On the West by Catherine Belton |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=10 July 2020 |accessdate=11 June 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/02/how-russia-became-a-leader-of-the-worldwide-christian-right-214755/|title = How Russia Became the Leader of the Global Christian Right|website = [[Politico]]| date=9 February 2017 }}</ref> Faith Hillis of the [[University of Chicago]] has argued that Putin "wants to reconstitute the Russian Empire and its guiding ideologies, which were orthodoxy, autocracy and nationality—except now, under the power of a very sophisticated police state."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://news.uchicago.edu/story/putin-invasion-ukraine-russian-empire-19th-century-imperialism-history|title=How Putin's invasion of Ukraine connects to 19th-century Russian imperialism |work=University of Chicago News|date=7 March 2022 }}</ref> A 2014 paper in the [[Journal of Eurasian Studies]] argued that "Putin has emphasized patriotism, power, and statism to justify centralization of power and authoritarian policies. Putin's policies and rhetoric are strong analogs to those of Nicholas."<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Cannady |first1=Sean |last2=Kubicek |first2=Paul |title=Nationalism and legitimation for authoritarianism: A comparison of Nicholas I and Vladimir Putin |journal=Journal of Eurasian Studies |date=1 January 2014 |volume=5 |issue=1 |pages=1–9 |doi=10.1016/j.euras.2013.11.001 |s2cid=145095605 }}</ref> [[Stan Grant (journalist)|Stan Grant]] of [[Charles Sturt University]] has argued that it "remains Putin's vision today. The church and the state are inseparable. The head of Russian Orthodoxy, Patriarch Kirill, has called Putin 'a miracle of God'."<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-03-20/vladimir-putin-invasion-ukraine-politics-holy-war/100921102|title = Why Putin's invasion of Ukraine is an utterly modern holy war|newspaper = ABC News|date = 19 March 2022}}</ref>  [[Foreign Policy]] journalist [[Michael Hirsh (journalist)|Michael Hirsh]] has stated that the policy "isn’t mentioned in Putin’s speeches and writings—he still likes to pretend Russia is a democracy—but it has been invoked by the far-right thinkers said to influence Putin, including [[Aleksandr Dugin]], [[Lev Gumilev]], [[Igor Shafarevich]], [[Ivan Ilyin]], [[Konstantin Leontiev]], [[Sergei Petrovich Trubetskoy]], and others dating back 200 years."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/03/12/putins-thousand-year-war/|title = Putin's Thousand-Year War| date=12 March 2022 |work=Foreign Policy}}</ref>

==See also==
* [[Byzantinism]]
* ''[[Liberté, égalité, fraternité]]''
* ''[[Melayu Islam Beraja|Melayu, Islam, Beraja]]''
* [[Nation, Religion, King]]
* [[Tsarist autocracy]]

== Citations ==
{{reflist|2}}

== General sources ==
* {{cite book |author1=Hoffmann, David Lloyd |author2=Kotsonis, Yanni |title=Russian modernity: politics, knowledge, practices |publisher=Palgrave Macmillan |year=2000 |isbn=978-0-312-22599-5 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=B8eKXXrOhVYC}}
* {{cite book |author=Hosking, Geoffrey |title=Russia: people and empire, 1552-1917 |publisher=Harvard University Press |year=1998 |isbn=978-0-674-78119-1 |url=https://archive.org/details/russiapeopleempi00hosk |url-access=registration |page=[https://archive.org/details/russiapeopleempi00hosk/page/146 146] |quote=Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and Nationality. }}
* {{cite book |author=Riasanovsky, Nicholas V. |authorlink=Nicholas V. Riasanovsky |title=Russian identities: a historical survey |publisher=Oxford University Press US |year=2005 |isbn=978-0-19-515650-8 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=T6Qb2vqUa9YC&dq=Orthodoxy,+Autocracy,+and+Nationality&pg=PA130 }}
* [http://www.krotov.info/acts/19/1833119.html Uvarov's report (in Russian)]

{{Russian nationalism}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Orthodoxy, Autocracy, And Nationality}}
[[Category:Eastern Orthodoxy and far-right politics]]
[[Category:Mottos]]
[[Category:Russian political phrases]]
[[Category:1830s quotations]]
[[Category:Political movements in the Russian Empire]]
[[Category:Russian nationalism]]
[[Category:Monarchism in Russia]]
[[Category:Far-right politics in Russia]]
[[Category:Nicholas I of Russia]]
[[Category:Russian philosophy]]
[[Category:Autocracy]]